New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

`Projections, Extents, and Layout Definitions` doc #1608

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 23, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@fosskers
Contributor

fosskers commented Aug 4, 2016

The other day, on gitter:

Me: Alright, I'm digging into the relationship between projections, layout definitions, and extents.

@echeipesh : That sounds like a title of an excellent doc page I wish we had.

@fosskers

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

fosskers commented Aug 4, 2016

Not confident of the line:

"min" and "max" here are CRS specific, as the location of the point (0,0) varies between different CRS.

@lossyrob

This comment has been minimized.

Member

lossyrob commented Aug 4, 2016

Would be useful to comment on the diff line you're referring to.

represented by two coordinate pairs that are its "min" and "max" corners in
some Coorindate Reference System. "min" and "max" here are CRS
specific, as the location of the point `(0,0)` varies between different CRS.
An Extent can also be referred to as a *Bounding Box*.

This comment has been minimized.

@lossyrob

lossyrob Aug 4, 2016

Member

The whole extent is CRS specific; anything relating to the Extent will have to be in that CRS, and users of the extent should know the CRS of the extent if they are trying to combine it with other things, either by knowing implicitly that all the geometries they are working with are in the same CRS, or explicitly by holding onto CRS instances, and reprojecting where necessary.

This comment has been minimized.

@fosskers

fosskers Aug 8, 2016

Contributor

Yup, that's mentioned in the next paragraph.

@lossyrob lossyrob merged commit 06d1306 into locationtech:master Sep 23, 2016

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@lossyrob lossyrob added this to the 1.0 milestone Oct 18, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment